You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum. This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.

Giving a professional favor, keeping him healthy since he doesn't have a longterm contract

0%

[ 0 ]

Belichick wants to see how we'd fare if we let him walk

40%

[ 9 ]

Total Votes : 22

Author

Message

mcmurtry86

Joined: 02 Mar 2010Posts: 32062

Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2012 6:30 pm Post subject:

finn54 wrote:

I would guess its because Welker has been poor in TC. He's missed time with injury/holdout/bereavement, and factoring that in with the fact that he's 31, he might just be not putting in good practices. I mean, he had 5 catches on sunday, but on 11 targets. That's hardly vintage Welker.

He didn't miss any time in training camp due to the holdout, there was no reported injury (I don't think) and he missed, what 2 (3?) days with the family issue.

I don't think that missing camp is the issue though I could see either an injury or family situation affecting his practices._________________

Stephen A. Smith on ESPN first take just said, We all consider this organization a first class organization. Wes Welker went for his contract extension. The New England Patriots slapped him with the franchise tag. This is what we call "weeding out". Trying to prove to the team that they can survive without their all time leading receiver. If he was in the game, they could have adjusted better to what the Cardinals were doing.

Saying they would have won the game in a round about way. I'm not trolling and I'm not the only one that feels this way.

Why didn't the Patriots do this with any of the other disgruntled players, hold outs and franchise tagged guys in Belichick's tenure?

Because it's not how he operates.

You're looking to find a (transparent) way to take a shot at Belichick and your ignorance of how the guy works is stunningly obvious.

Anyone who thinks Bill Belichick would take one of his best players out of the game plan out of spite or because his "feelings are hurt" is flat out ignorant. That's really all there is to it. It goes for people on this board, it goes for people in the media. After 12 years of watching the guy operate, we should all know how he works and what drives him._________________

He didn't miss any time in training camp due to the holdout, there was no reported injury (I don't think) and he missed, what 2 (3?) days with the family issue.

I don't think that missing camp is the issue though I could see either an injury or family situation affecting his practices.

When i said "TC", i meant the entire off-season program: he missed approximately 1 month of the early off-season workouts. I left it as injury/bereavement because it was never confirmed which it actually was, although it looks like it wasn't an injury (and if it was, it was nothing major). And he actually missed one week of practice during training camp. In terms of the days he actually missed, it meant he participated in neither week 2 or week 3, and also sat out week 4. So he only played in the first preseason game, and totaled 16 snaps for the whole of the preseason. I know some people love to think that the preseason is meaningless, but that simply isn't the case. The only way to get in "football condition" is to play in games, as BB has stated numerous times in the past._________________

Stephen A. Smith on ESPN first take just said, We all consider this organization a first class organization. Wes Welker went for his contract extension. The New England Patriots slapped him with the franchise tag. This is what we call "weeding out". Trying to prove to the team that they can survive without their all time leading receiver. If he was in the game, they could have adjusted better to what the Cardinals were doing.

Saying they would have won the game in a round about way. I'm not trolling and I'm not the only one that feels this way.

Why didn't the Patriots do this with any of the other disgruntled players, hold outs and franchise tagged guys in Belichick's tenure?

Because it's not how he operates.

You're looking to find a (transparent) way to take a shot at Belichick and your ignorance of how the guy works is stunningly obvious.

Anyone who thinks Bill Belichick would take one of his best players out of the game plan out of spite or because his "feelings are hurt" is flat out ignorant. That's really all there is to it. It goes for people on this board, it goes for people in the media. After 12 years of watching the guy operate, we should all know how he works and what drives him.

Your argument....

Bill has made very few poor decisions in the past. I agree.

Therefore, Bill did not and will not make any poor decisions. I disagree._________________

Stephen A. Smith on ESPN first take just said, We all consider this organization a first class organization. Wes Welker went for his contract extension. The New England Patriots slapped him with the franchise tag. This is what we call "weeding out". Trying to prove to the team that they can survive without their all time leading receiver. If he was in the game, they could have adjusted better to what the Cardinals were doing.

Saying they would have won the game in a round about way. I'm not trolling and I'm not the only one that feels this way.

Why didn't the Patriots do this with any of the other disgruntled players, hold outs and franchise tagged guys in Belichick's tenure?

Because it's not how he operates.

You're looking to find a (transparent) way to take a shot at Belichick and your ignorance of how the guy works is stunningly obvious.

Anyone who thinks Bill Belichick would take one of his best players out of the game plan out of spite or because his "feelings are hurt" is flat out ignorant. That's really all there is to it. It goes for people on this board, it goes for people in the media. After 12 years of watching the guy operate, we should all know how he works and what drives him.

Your argument....

Bill has made very few poor decisions in the past. I agree.

Therefore, Bill did not and will not make any poor decisions. I disagree.

Do you have a better idea of why he would bench him in favor of Julian? It is obviously not because talent and it has been reported that he is healthy. "Unless you just started watching football." Maybe you have a better answer that hasn't come to my mind? It wouldn't be the first time. The idea that Bill makes few mistakes. Therefore he won't make a mistake. That doesn't work for me._________________

Do you have a better idea of why he would bench him in favor of Julian? It is obviously not because talent and it has been reported that he is healthy. "Unless you just started watching football." Maybe you have a better answer that hasn't come to my mind? It wouldn't be the first time.

Seriously? I've written entire paragraphs in this very thread about my feelings as to what's going on.

I've also explained that the idea that it is "reported that he is healthy" is meaningless to anyone who follows the Patriots.

Good example - Leigh Bodden. His play struggled for a few weeks. People kept asking what's up, why is he losing snaps, why is he struggling. We heard a lot of "coaches decision" and "I'm [he's] healthy" Turns out, he had a career ending back injury.

There have been literally dozens of guys in Belichick's tenure who have been reported to be healthy and then it turns out they're hurt. Tom Brady said many times last year his non-throwing shoulder was "fine" and not injured. Turns out it was. The Patriots are notorious for hiding injuries and releasing as little info as possible.

Quote:

The idea that Bill makes few mistakes. Therefore he won't make a mistake. That doesn't work for me.

You really need to stop repeating this because it's not at all what I've suggested. I don't care if that statement doesn't "work for you" because it's not what I'm saying and you're either creating a strawman or didn't read my posts carefully._________________

Why didn't the Patriots do this with any of the other disgruntled players, hold outs and franchise tagged guys in Belichick's tenure?

Because it's not how he operates.

You're looking to find a (transparent) way to take a shot at Belichick and your ignorance of how the guy works is stunningly obvious.

Anyone who thinks Bill Belichick would take one of his best players out of the game plan out of spite or because his "feelings are hurt" is flat out ignorant. That's really all there is to it. It goes for people on this board, it goes for people in the media. After 12 years of watching the guy operate, we should all know how he works and what drives him.

This is what I'm referring to when i say you are using his decisions in the past to draw a conclusion on this situation.

Since Welker himself said he is healthy. Nobody has voted for the "Secret injury" in the poll. If you cross that out as an option and take his word for it. 70% of your Patriots fans voted for he held him out in order to see the team without him._________________

This is what I'm referring to when i say you are using his decisions in the past to draw a conclusion on this situation.

You still don't get it. I honestly don't know how to spell it out for you any more.

Quote:

Since Welker himself said he is healthy.

I already explained why this means nothing

Quote:

Nobody has voted for the "Secret injury" in the poll.

So what? Who cares?

Quote:

If you cross that out as an option and take his word for it.

I don't take his word for it and wrote a paragraph with an example of why I don't. You must have missed it

Quote:

70% of your Patriots fans voted for he held him out in order to see the team without him.

Ok, so remove the most likely option (which like your preferred option has 7 votes) because it's convenient for your argument?

Seriously, citing a Patriots' player's comment in the media should be a nonstarter as proof of anything in an intellectual conversation. That you are not only citing it, but basing an entire argument around it, tells me that you lack either knowledge of the Patriots and how things work in Foxboro or you are being deliberately obtuse in order to take a shot at Belichick.

No informed Patriots (or football) fan would use a quote from a Patriot player in the media as the basis of an argument.

I'll say it again, your argument - that Belichick is reducing Welker in response to Welker's contract (you used the term "hurt feelings") is as illogical as it is inane and ignorant of literally decades of Bill Belichick's history in the NFL. Even spanning back to his days with the Browns or Giants. All he cares about is winning and getting a competitive edge. If he thought Welker was the Wes Welker we have come to known (i.e. a top WR who is a core part of the team), Wes Welker would be playing his usual number of snaps.

That Welker has been taken out of the gameplan tells us, quite clearly, that Belichick thinks Welker isn't the best guy to put out there for some reason. The only things that can explain why Welker is a worse option than Edelman are bad practices, off field distractions/discipline issues or an injury.

You know how Bill Belichick figures out how the team can operate without one of his core players? He dumps that player. That's it. There is no tinkering or "phasing out". Lawyer Milloy, Richard Seymour, Randy Moss are all really obvious examples of this.

There is no short term or long term advantage to reducing Welker's playing time. Sure, long term you might know if Edelman is up to that, but I'm quite sure that Belichick could make that decision without seeing it in real game action at the expense of the team's chances of winning.

Literally nothing about the "phase out/contract issues hurt Belichick's feelings" argument makes sense with what we have seen from Bill Belichick in his 30 years in the NFL. At this point in his career you think he is going to alter his core principles? He is going to all of a sudden become a petty, spiteful guy and put his personal feelings for a player above the team's chances of winning? If you really do think that, more power to you and I won't be able to change your mind. It doesn't make it any less illogical or incongruous based on over a decade of evidence._________________

1. If we're going to start basing our arguments around what Wes Welker says, perhaps we should examine his tone and demeanor. Absolutely nothing in his tone or demeanor in his comments suggests he is unhappy with the decision to play him less. Think about it:

if you were in a contract year looking for (likely) your one big pay day before retirement - would you be happy and calm about seeing reduced snaps?

That Welker seems content with his role in the offense tells me he and Belichick are on the same page.

2. If you were the Patriots - a team which chose to franchise tag Welker and guarantee him 9.5M this year......why would you reduce your return on investment? That runs directly against the Patriot Way and 12+ years of Belichick front office strategy. They routinely play guys on 1 year franchise deals and use that franchise tag to (essentially) force players into playing on Patriot friendly contracts.

3. Both Logan Mankins and Asante Samuel were engaged in high profile (media exposure) and acrimonious contract squabbles with the Patriots. Both guys took numerous shots at the Patriots in the media during their dispute. You know what happened when those guys showed up in the locker room? They were installed as full time starters. There was no "lets see how we could do without him"

4. Playing "lets see how we are without Welker" is idiotic when his replacement - Julian Edelman is unsigned for next season. Not only are the Pats hurting their current on-field product, but if Edelman succeeds it drives his price (and demand) way up, if Edelman flops, you've hurt relations with Welker and the team is extremely unlikely to be willing to up their offer to Welker. If the Pats don't view themselves as "winning" a contract negotiation - they don't sign the deal. It's a lose-lose-lose situation for a team which has almost never put themselves in anything other than win-win situations (in their favor)._________________

Michael Lombardi thinks that Juilian is a better outside WR than Wes Welker is. He also said that the Pats are trying (before the Herno injury) to have 2 outside WRs along w. their two TE (and Aaron does the inside damage like Wes does).
He alluded to the 2007 season where in the beginning, it was Moss and Stallworth/Gaffney starting and Wes got on the field in nickel WR sets.

Michael Lombardi thinks that Juilian is a better outside WR than Wes Welker is. He also said that the Pats are trying (before the Herno injury) to have 2 outside WRs along w. their two TE (and Aaron does the inside damage like Wes does).
He alluded to the 2007 season where in the beginning, it was Moss and Stallworth/Gaffney starting and Wes got on the field in nickel WR sets.

In my opinion, this is one of the best explanations for what's going on.

I've been complaining for over a year now about how Welker just doesn't fit with the 2TE offense. If you have 2 TEs and you want Welker in the slot, you have three options. You can put both WRs on one side, you can put a TE outside Welker, or you can go 5-wide. If you put both TEs inside next to an offensive lineman and a WR on each side, Welker's effectiveness is drastically decreased.

Now, I didn't expect Edelman to be the guy to win the outside spot from Welker, but beating out Welker for an outside WR job isn't nearly as hard as it sounds. Edelman's not a fast or big option outside, but he's both bigger and faster than Welker, and it sounds like he really improved his route running over the offseason.

Anyone who thinks belichick would purposefully sabotage the team because he disliked a player or had an issue with a player clearly has absolutely zero idea how belichick works. You're just trying to take a shot at him because you dislike him.

And quoting Stephen a smith as your source or as reference point is the quickest way to discredit yourself. Guy is an idiot._________________